Nvidia's desktop GPU dominance grows to 88% as market returns to normal

It's bad news for us all if nVidia's market dominance continues - the prices for consumer products will just increase, and increase... and there's less need to increase performance.

Given the significant price difference between AMD and nVidia, I'm astonished that RDNA3 hasn't sold better.

Achaios said:

So, AMD GPU dept has fallen to irrelevancy in spite of AMD fanbois' sincere efforts herein and elsewhere/elsewhen to convince us otherwise.

Perhaps it is time for Lisa Su to come down on the AMD GP Dept hard and change some things as what they are doing is obv not working.

The Leatherman largely plays alone with no competition.

P.S.: In light of recent developments, I predict RTX 5090 MSRP to be at least $ 3K.

Click to expand...

I guess you haven't paid attention to AMDs announcements. That green coolaid does things to the brain.

yRaz said:

I guess you haven't paid attention to AMDs announcements. That green coolaid does things to the brain.

Click to expand...

Play the message not the person.

You have just attacked the person without supplying any alternative perspective. What part if the message are you disagreeing with? Why? What is your source?

yRaz said:

I guess you haven't paid attention to AMDs announcements. That green coolaid does things to the brain.

Click to expand...

I don't understand how someone who repeatedly and purposefully ridicules Huang as the "Leatherman" could be taken as an NVIDIA fanboi?

Do you you imagine me sniffing yayo together with Huang in a LA "villa" while receiving large green paychecks on PAYPAL?

Damn, I am GTA VI material.

Does nVidia price 5000 series high on the premise they are top level performance - or if prices go up, will then AMD look as an affordable for many leaving nVidia with faster technology that's simply not affordable or considered a value to consumers? If your nVidia, your looking at 3000 series and before owners thinking, how much can I charge them before they decide not to upgrade (group 1), and for others (group 2) how much can charge them before they buy AMD (or Intel)...

If Lisa Su had no plan, you can bet big changes would happen to the Radeon Group right now, perhaps next gen yet again is, well what it is, and either she is good with these efforts to profits ratio like this, or AMD has something (maybe down the road a bit) to keep them in the battle. Reality is, for (team green) fan boys the 7900 XTX sucks, minus rays its a strong card and holds it own well which leaves AMD to where only a tad more raster, but a lot more rays and its once again a top contender.

So AMD sold about 40% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.
And Nvidia sold about 46% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.

Which is why I love reading people's superficial, antagonistic posts because in today's world what really matters is spin.

Lew Zealand said:

So AMD sold about 40% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.
And Nvidia sold about 46% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.

Which is why I love reading people's superficial, antagonistic posts because in today's world what really matters is spin.

Click to expand...

40% of 100 is still a helluvalot lower than 46% of 10,000.

That's strange. That's an AI company

TomSEA said:

40% of 100 is still a helluvalot lower than 46% of 10,000.

Click to expand...

OK... and 46% of 100 is still a helluvalot lower than 40% of 10,000.

Did you have a point?

Lew Zealand said:

OK... and 46% of 100 is still a helluvalot lower than 40% of 10,000.

Did you have a point?

Click to expand...

I made my point. You can quibble about percentage points, but it's all about the volume.

TomSEA said:

40% of 100 is still a helluvalot lower than 46% of 10,000.

Click to expand...

The 1:100 ratio is a bit much... per the numbers in this article at least, it'd be closer to 140% of 120 and 146% of 840.

opckieran said:

The 1:100 ratio is a bit much... per the numbers in this article at least, it'd be closer to 140% of 120 and 146% of 840.

Click to expand...

Yup, Nvidia has much larger raw numbers to begin with so added more in raw numbers. But the expansions for both businesses were similar in scope, which was the point. As opposed to some histrionic comments here.

TomSEA said:

I made my point. You can quibble about percentage points, but it's all about the volume.

Click to expand...

If your point was to equate 1:100 with 1:7.3, then that'll make it easy to ignore as your volume is off by a factor of 13X.

I can't wait for 5070 to cost 1500 bucks. It will be even more funny when 6070 cost 2000. People always say how much they want AMD to die, well you almost got your wish. Get ready to open your wallets, and hope they are deep enough. Stuff won't get cheaper the way things are going. I honestly won't be shocked if RTS 7060ti has a price tag of 1500. Imagine how much a 7050 will cost lol.

GPU market is starting to look a lot like the phone market. Nobody can buy the new cards every single year, people start buying the 30 series when the 40 series hit. I guess getting the 40 series might be a good time when the 50 series arrive. Shame really, just like the phone industry. I used to have top of the line phone (and GPU actually) every year. LOL, good lucking to anyone doing that after 2022. Every flagship is like 1100-1500+

Not entirely correct Starfals, people will buy 30 serie again when 50 is out, becuase 4090 can crack PCB and burn iteself (or the system) and 3090 Ti has same performance as 4080 but with 24 giga (and if you whant to do CUDA, you can't realy do deep learning on 4080 with so littel memory)

oasked said:

Given the significant price difference between AMD and nVidia, I'm astonished that RDNA3 hasn't sold better.

Click to expand...

It hasn't sold better, because it blows in comparison. AMD is cheaper for a reason, and it's because it is very very very weak compared to nVidia. If it wasn't, then nVidia wouldn't be able to sell at the prices they do, because people wouldn't pay them. AMD needs to seriously up their game, most notably they need to hire driver developers that have a clue, because their current ones are terribad and make AMD products play nearly all games, even those 'designed for AMD', like crap.

oasked said:

It's bad news for us all if nVidia's market dominance continues - the prices for consumer products will just increase, and increase... and there's less need to increase performance.

Given the significant price difference between AMD and nVidia, I'm astonished that RDNA3 hasn't sold better.

Click to expand...

It's not surprising at all. The RX 6000s were faster at raster, had twice the video memory, and OCed better then ampere. The tradeoff was worse RT performance.

3 years later, RT hasnt gone away. Its still used in new games. In that respect, rDNA3 stalled completely. They doubled the shader account, and SM vs SM, did absolutely diddly squat over rDNA2. The chiplet design limited clock rates limiting performance increases on the high end. Meanwhile, ADA came around, with significant perf/W improvements, substantial RT improvement, oh and that 4090 dominating charts. DLSS has improved significantly over FSR as well.

The 7900xtx was cheaper then the 4080, a good move, and had more video memory, but launched into a market where inflation is a thing and high end card simply didnt sell well. On the mid range, AMD waited too long to launch the 7800xt. The 7600xt made 0 improvement over the 6650xt, barely a bump over the 6600xt, and was limited with 8GB VRAM. The 7600, 7700, and 7900xt all launched at silly prices that made them terrible buys too.

and with the launch of the SUPER series, AMD had no price advantage. A 4080 super was the same price as a 7900xtx, just as fast in raster, and dominated with RT. AMD needs to consistently compete but soured goodwill with pricing shenanigans, and added fuel to the driver fire by letting the 6000 series languish for an entire quarter, to the point that the 6900xt was slower then the 3090 in newer games because of a lack of optimization (that thing people get mad at nvidia for doing). Dropping 6 year old cards from driver support and placing polaris and vega on life support didnt inspire confidence either.

Starfals said:

I can't wait for 5070 to cost 1500 bucks. It will be even more funny when 6070 cost 2000. People always say how much they want AMD to die, well you almost got your wish. Get ready to open your wallets, and hope they are deep enough. Stuff won't get cheaper the way things are going. I honestly won't be shocked if RTS 7060ti has a price tag of 1500. Imagine how much a 7050 will cost lol.

GPU market is starting to look a lot like the phone market. Nobody can buy the new cards every single year, people start buying the 30 series when the 40 series hit. I guess getting the 40 series might be a good time when the 50 series arrive. Shame really, just like the phone industry. I used to have top of the line phone (and GPU actually) every year. LOL, good lucking to anyone doing that after 2022. Every flagship is like 1100-1500+

Click to expand...

Nobody is saying "I cant wait for AMD to die". Your fantasies of oppression are leaking out.

Consumers want confidence and consistency in a brand. AMD has done a fantastic job of having more misfires then hits, and doing just....dumb stuff that helps nobody. Hell, theyre now saying no rDNA43 flagship, so those of us that bought high end AMD are left high and dry. Again.

Also, on cell phones, the last few years have seen an explosion of budget 6-700 flagships like the moto thinkphone. Great phone, paid $400 for it on sale, super fast.

I like AMD and I want them to succeed. That being said, it's hard to feel sympathy for their GPU division, because their problems are entirely self-inflicted. AMD has delusional pricing and think they deserve the same margins Nvidia gets, instead of facing the reality that they're second in features right now and need to be consumer-friendly to stand any chance.

Following up the RX 6000 series (which launched during the pandemic where the entire market was crazy, but later dropped to prices that were starting to look good) they could absolute have maintained the realistic, consumer-friendly pricing. But instead of having the RX 7600 (a 204 mm^2 chip) replace the RX 6600 to give people more performance at the sub-$200 market, they chose to launch it at $270, priced higher than the bigger chip that is the RX 6600 XT (237 mm^2). The Navi 32 chip in the 7800 XT (346 mm^2) is barely larger than the Navi 22 chip in the 6700 XT (335 mm^2). And yet, despite the 6700 XT selling for around $300, they made the 7800 XT a $500 card, and its cut-down version in the 7700 XT a nonsensical $450 card (matched in performance by the RX 6800 that sells for $400). They could have easily had the RX 7600 and RX 7700 XT at the same ~$200 and ~$300 price ranges the 6600 and 6700 XT occupy (with tighter margins, of course), and have much more competitive products against Nvidia that people would have a reason to buy (Nvidia literally only has trash in the $200 range, and the 7700 XT would be a no-brainer against the RTX 4060 at ~$300). But they simply chose not to do that. Because they think if Nvidia can have fat margins, then they are entitled to fat margins as well.

It's hard to defend this anti-consumer nonsense. We used to benefit from die shrinks by having more performance at lower prices. But now AMD uses die shrinks to sell us the same performance at the same (or higher) prices, and pad their own margins instead. If this is the AMD we're getting in the GPU market, then they might as well just go ahead and die, and let Intel have their shot on the GPU market instead.

The cost of not having the crown. If AMD would have a gpu better than the 4090 in performance, efficiency, etc... I would be willing to pay more for such a card. I am pretty sure I am not the only one. I hope they don't drop the ball to Intel's Battlemage.
Rumors have it that the 5080 is going to be a cut down version from the original 96 sms to 84 sms. The 5090 rumors are also a cut down 448 bit gpu. For some reason I think the original fuller fat chip ( 512 bit vram) will be a titan for the whales and Nvidia moved everything one tier up in premium pricing.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-rtx-5080-5090-spec-rumors/

I still predict that many enthusiasts will hold out for rdna5 for a market correction.

Lastly if the rumors of the 5080 not dethroning the 4090 is true than the 4090 will hold its value on the second hand used market.

Intel realized his position in dGPU market and priced accordingly, with low margins, no margins or at a loss.

AMD is stil dreaming at pricing close to Nvidia, but with a subpar product that need 9 months to develop a driver after launch. I'm talkin about FSR3.

Not talking about 50W when doing nothing with more than one screen or playing YT video. RT it's also not there yet, not that it matters except for 4090, but event that can't push 60 fps in some games.

Hell yeah Nvidia will price higher and higher because "the more you buy, the more you save" and "More's law is dead".

A new law is rising, Jensen's law "new GPU will never be at the same price or lower than previous ones".

Lew Zealand said:

So AMD sold about 40% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.
And Nvidia sold about 46% more GPUs in Q1 this year than last year.

Which is why I love reading people's superficial, antagonistic posts because in today's world what really matters is spin.

Click to expand...

Could you elaborate on how is this relevant to the main point of the article, which is that Nvidia has increased and AMD lost market share?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall, it sure is sad that Nvidia can dominate the market so easily and AMD seems to be giving up. It will no doubt be reflected in their pricing strategy. I've been buying Green cards for the last decade or so (since HD 4070), which I suppose on forums like this one here makes me a shill/fanboi, but in the real world usually the better product wins. Even though the received wisdom here seems to be that "RT doesn't matter" or that DLSS is "smoke and mirrors". Clearly, the general public disagrees, and I doubt Nvidia's in-built mind control chips and subliminal advertising (citation needed) are so effective as to brainwash a whopping 88% of the GPU buying massive.

AMD can't compete anymore, that's the sad truth for consumers. Inferior products, yet Nvidia style prices for mid tier, which is the bread and butter of sales. Poor man's RT and an inferior upscaler? Who wouldn't pay 50$ more for much better features? AMD is years behind and now they decided to just quit. Quitting high end it's a death sentence. They will continue to make mid tier sub par products 50 bucks cheaper and hope Nvidia won't crush them, again. But they will and then it's entry level cards and RIP. One thing is guaranteed for us, price hikes and little incentive for better improvemens.